At what cost to protect yourself?

[Die Judicii]

This is probably the closest I'll get to asking PM Abbot for an answer... so here I go.

Prime Minister, Now that you have committed Australia to the latest conflict against ISIS, and we now have their response...
which asks ISIS supporters in Australia to kill ordinary everyday Australians anywhere they can in Australia.

My question is... If an Australian citizen is attacked by one of these extremists, and manages to kill or injure their attacker, where does the Australian citizen stand in relation to the law ?

Will he/she be punished for doing so?

I feel sure there are many Australian citizens that would appreciate having this question answered.

[Guliver]

Fairly sure it OK to use whatever force is appropriate, so if your life is threatened and your attacker ends up a little bit dead, you've reacted with appropriate force. Just don't quote me in court.

[1290]

Sorry, you're asking the wrong question.

You dont want to know where you stand in the eyes of the law if you 'kill' an ISIS extremist...
Self defence will be assessed by the courts all the same regardless of who is involved, theoretically....

After all, if you reasonably consider your life in peril.... you do what you need to, dont think the pm is going to say yes, kill the bearded dark skinned guy if you're threatened....

You want to know what the law is doing to protect 'us', and the question should relate to the oath of our 'protectors' as agents for the crown, yes the oath of the police to uphold Pax Regis. I wouldnt be surprised if 99.9% of serving officers, PEACE officers AKA police officers didnt know or want to know what Pax Regis is....

It is an oath to protect the security of person and property of all people. As we all know this is not possible, as such we need to protect ourselves we can not rely on the police to be stationed outside our front door and to accompany us on every public outing (Note some classes of people are afforded this protection)

Many might be surprised that police were not invented to site in a police car on the side of the road holding a speed detector while 'earning revenue' and eating doughnuts...

When you couple this predicament with the dis-arming de-arming and outright restriction on firearms this translates to the government not only not protecting us but leaving us in jeopardy. "We cant protect you, neither can you!"

This may therefore be an opportunity (public threats to our safety) to raise the question of how we can protect ourselves, an opportunity to raise the question of firearm for self defence!! or at least removing the necessity to demonstrate a need, with the implication that should you wish to use firearms to protect yourself, your family and your property, its up to your own discretion.

Crazy thought, but in other 'civilised' nations, you can keep firearms at home.....and hint, you dont need to be a member of a target shooting or hunting club..... oh, and you dont have your personal information, address, number and type serial number on a globally distributed database .

[whert]

I learned today on the radio the PM has a private security detail with him when he goes anywhere.

Now I understand why self defence isn't an option here. We're just supposed to have private body guards? Must be nice to have the tax payer cover that for you while leaving the rest of us out to dry.

[Korkt]

I can see this being a turning point, or at least a first step for really acknowledging self defence in Australia.

God forbid anything actually happen to anyone, but in the event someone was forced to defence themselves and an ISIS attacker was killed imagine the uproar for prosecuting them if the powers that be decided to.

I can't see many prosecutors for the state wanting to be that person.

[Sender]

As we all know this is not possible, as such we need to protect ourselves we can not rely on the police to be stationed outside our front door and to accompany us on every public outing

When seconds count the police are only minutes away is the expression I think.

[1290]

As we all know this is not possible, as such we need to protect ourselves we can not rely on the police to be stationed outside our front door and to accompany us on every public outing

When seconds count the police are only minutes away is the expression I think.

That pretty much sums it up....

A while back I 'needed' the police and even though the station was not 2kms away it took them over 2 hours to arrive.... learnt my lesson.

[Sakoh]

I'd love to hear some opinions from the beat cops on this, not the higher ups who are towing the political line.

Everyone likes to bash "the cops" as an whole but the beat cops are just doing their job as instructed. It's obviously not their fault if they get a call about a home invasion and they're half an hour away. Or if they get 2 calls at once etc. They can't be everywhere.

Imagine being a husband and dad and either a) getting out to somewhere too late and a family is down.

Or getting there after an attack when someone has defended their family against an attacker and then having to start on potentially charging the guy with assault or manslaughter or whatever. That would almost be worse.

I find it hard to imagine they all feel the same as the politicians with their bodyguards?

[Die Judicii]

The truth,,,,,, the way I see it is ;

The government in as many words has announced that we are at war with ISIS.

So does it follow that if an Aussie has his life threatened by a so called Jihadist / ISIS person, isn't that person the enemy ??????

Regardless of whether in Australia or not, if we are "At War", there should not be any penalty for killing or injuring the "enemy"

[Baronvonrort]

You dont want to know where you stand in the eyes of the law if you 'kill' an ISIS extremist...
Self defence will be assessed by the courts all the same regardless of who is involved, theoretically....

After all, if you reasonably consider your life in peril.... you do what you need to, dont think the pm is going to say yes, kill the bearded dark skinned guy if you're threatened....

I disagree that all muslims are dark skinned, muslims come from all races, there are many sahih ahadith that say Profit Mo was white like this verse which mentions the whiteness of his thigh-
http://www.sunnah.com/muslim/32/147
Jihad Jane is a blue eyed blonde in jail on terror charges.

Was Muhammad a fat white dwarf?
http://www.sunnah.com/abudawud/42/154

The Bosnian muslims are white, the Bosnian war criminal Naser Oric started that conflict with the Serbs, lots of Jihad nasheed videos on youtube, this one is white Bosnian muslims with english subtitles.
If you see a muslim shout out 'TakeBeer", they will respond with Allahu Akbar (watch video around 27 seconds) then you raise your beer and say bloody oath mate..lol.
The Quran allows alcohol so why do muslims avoid it?
http://www.quran.com/16/67
Bosnian Jihad nasheed video-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0G7zmbfIh0

The Islamic state are sunni/salafi Islam, they consider the twelver shiites to be deviant heretics and those sectarian battles between sunni and shia started with the battle of the camel around 1400 years ago.
The Islamic regime in Iran is barbaric and brutal, Iranian atheists would be called Islamophobes by the ignorant leftists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_604fvjg_Sw

5 muslims in the news today casing out the lucas heights nuclear reactor, they even had time for prayer in the bush, i reckon ASIO will be informed about them, all had beards.

Muslims started trimming the moustace with the beard a fist length from the chin so they could recognise each other on the battlefield,the Jews also had beards that is who they were fighting.

I have friends who are ex muslims, some of them have to pretend to be muslim because Islam has the death penalty for leaving Islam.

[1290]

You dont want to know where you stand in the eyes of the law if you 'kill' an ISIS extremist...
Self defence will be assessed by the courts all the same regardless of who is involved, theoretically....

After all, if you reasonably consider your life in peril.... you do what you need to, dont think the pm is going to say yes, kill the bearded dark skinned guy if you're threatened....

I disagree that all muslims are dark skinned, muslims come from all races, there are many sahih ahadith that say Profit Mo was white like this verse which mentions the whiteness of his thigh-
http://www.sunnah.com/muslim/32/147
Jihad Jane is a blue eyed blonde in jail on terror charges.

Was Muhammad a fat white dwarf?
http://www.sunnah.com/abudawud/42/154

The Bosnian muslims are white, the Bosnian war criminal Naser Oric started that conflict with the Serbs, lots of Jihad nasheed videos on youtube, this one is white Bosnian muslims with english subtitles.
If you see a muslim shout out 'TakeBeer", they will respond with Allahu Akbar (watch video around 27 seconds) then you raise your beer and say bloody oath mate..lol.
The Quran allows alcohol so why do muslims avoid it?
http://www.quran.com/16/67
Bosnian Jihad nasheed video-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0G7zmbfIh0

The Islamic state are sunni/salafi Islam, they consider the twelver shiites to be deviant heretics and those sectarian battles between sunni and shia started with the battle of the camel around 1400 years ago.
The Islamic regime in Iran is barbaric and brutal, Iranian atheists would be called Islamophobes by the ignorant leftists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_604fvjg_Sw

5 muslims in the news today casing out the lucas heights nuclear reactor, they even had time for prayer in the bush, i reckon ASIO will be informed about them, all had beards.

Muslims started trimming the moustace with the beard a fist length from the chin so they could recognise each other on the battlefield,the Jews also had beards that is who they were fighting.

I have friends who are ex muslims, some of them have to pretend to be muslim because Islam has the death penalty for leaving Islam.

From all that I said, you take the part about the color of the Muslims??? The point is that at the airport, or in the shopping centre or in the sports stadium or on the street they would typically look for the 'poster muslim'.... I realise there are white yellow brown black etc muslims, just like there are yellow white brown black jews....
WTF are talking about with the muslims and jews fighting over beards???

[Baronvonrort]

We don't need to profile non muslims for terror unless they belong to some radical group, for the Islamic state supporters ASIO/Federal-State Police only need to look at the sunni/salafi side of Islam.

Devout muslims and jews have beards, the muslims trim the moustace the jews do not,Muhammad ordered this so muslims would not chop the wrong heads off on the battlefield against the jews.

The origins of the muslim/jew problem go back to when Muhammad tried to impose himself on the jews as a prophet in their religion, he adopted many dietry and dress rules from the jews, he fasted on the jewish day of atonement hoping the jews would accept him, the jews rejected Muhammad as a prophet in their religion and Muhammad hated them from that day, this is covered in the Sira of Ibn Hisham and other Islamic texts.

Muhammad was a thief, a highway robber, when the jews rejected him he stole all their prophets to give his bulls**t religion credibility and started killing them, he had over 800 male jewish heads chopped off in 1 day, the women and children were sold into slavery or married to muslims who chopped the heads off their families, all the wealth was stolen and according to http://www.quran.com/8/41 allah and his messenger got a 20% cut,it's good to be the Profit.

The Islamic state are doing exactly what Muhammad did, the Quran tells you to follow his example,check out the list of expeditions and the first one was highway robbery to relieve muslims from poverty, number 32 Invasion of Banu Qurayza was the first mass slaughter of jews by muslims.
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o ... f_Muhammad
Ex muslims are setting the record straight on wikipedia,the only reliable pages about Islam on wikipedia were done by ex muslims,muslims are allowed to tell lies and the BS flows thick and fast.

On the subject of self defence, a good article by David Leyonhjelm in todays dailytelegraph which is worth reading, i cannot link it because i have used up my free quota.

[Morro]

1290
Try not to be so arrogantly self rightgeous Im sure someone on here that lives near you will give you the cuddle you have needed all your life cause obviously those 99.9% boys havn't
Grow up

[MeccaOz]

I learned today on the radio the PM has a private security detail with him when he goes anywhere.

Now I understand why self defence isn't an option here. We're just supposed to have private body guards? Must be nice to have the tax payer cover that for you while leaving the rest of us out to dry.

In the case of ordinary citizens in Australia. Our bodyguards are NOT allowed to carry on the pretext of your personal security. They can carry to protect your property, for example you and your wife are going out for the evening and she is wearing a million dollar necklace. lol we the sheeple are just that mate ... Sheep to be herded.

[Supporter]

So this is news...

The cops in Melbourne shot an ISIS supporter who attacked them in a station.

[Streamline]

Our bodyguards are NOT allowed to carry on the pretext of your personal security. They can carry to protect your property, for example you and your wife are going out for the evening and she is wearing a million dollar necklace.

In that case I'd like a body guard to protect my shirt. Specifically against bullet holes, knife cuts or blunt object dents.

Kosher?

[Shotfox]

1290 is correct about the oath taken by police etc. However police are minutes away when seconds count.

Since '96 there has been a slow disarmament of people and the right to protect ourselves mostly be scare mongering and political rhetoric by the likes of the greens.

Even to the point of non leathal means such as capsicum spray, tasers are illegal. Women, the aged the disabled are most vulnerable and likely targets.

Now there is a ramp up of threat to Australians in general its back on the agenda so lets see if the 20 year old laws get overhauled?

[Baronvonrort]

David Leyonhjelm on self defence-

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/o ... 7066816939

[Redwood]

Even to the point of non lethal means such as capsicum spray, tasers are illegal. Women, the aged the disabled are most vulnerable and likely targets.

That's something I've never understood. I've heard arguments that if pepper spray becomes legal crims will start using it in holdups and s**t like that.

It's not like they don't manage without the stuff as it is. I dunno about you, but I'll take getting pepper sprayed over getting stabbed or clubbed with a bat any day.

As it is there are large sections of the population at a huge disadvantage in this kind of situation. Regardless of any fringe problems legalising sprays and tasers would level the playing field for a huge number of people.

Has to be worth it overall I think.

[1290]

keep pepper spray illegal so that the crims dont get hold of it..... like saying that we should make sawn off shotties, stolen pistols, AKs etc illegal so the crims neither have access to those, maybe try to make drugs illegal so the crims cant access them too!!

Laws regulate the law abiding.

Legislating against guns disarms the members of the community who not only want them but also.... need them.

If the police are vulnerable outside a police station, what about average joe in the streets??

As far as yesterdays incident, the kid was carrying a short knife that he stabbed with, a longer one for pics later maybe, but why have no agencies reported the AXE?? CLEARLY VISIBLE IN THE VISION. (we're too sensitive to think about the use of the axe to 'finish off'?) the other object were a couple of steel pickets and picket drivers.... AND the reports of the second person looking on!! Was he(?) filming the 'event'. It appears we're only drip-fed info as necessary.

[Aussier]

If the police are vulnerable outside a police station, what about average joe in the streets?

That thought had crossed my mind for what's happening in Canberra ATM.

Beefed up security around Parliament House... So what happens some nutjob decides Parliament House is too difficult a target and goes down the road knocking on the door of Joe Blow to pull out into the street to film his 'message' instead?

Any increased security for the neighbours? I sure haven't seen any.

[Die Judicii]

Gee,,,,,,,,,,
The govt must be getting slack.

They haven't banned axes yet ??????????????

[1290]

If anything this is proof that we live in a class society.... them and us. They can have their private public funded auto rifle toting force.... we can even carry pepper spray....

I'm wondering if the Axe would fall under vics no-knife carry laws....

[Harper]

Pays to be a chef maybe so you have excuse to carry one around with you

[cavok]

I learned today on the radio the PM has a private security detail with him when he goes anywhere.

Now I understand why self defence isn't an option here. We're just supposed to have private body guards? Must be nice to have the tax payer cover that for you while leaving the rest of us out to dry.

Actually in Victoria and sunny Australia we, both you and I have the same right to use force in protecting ourselves and others. Reasonable and proportionate force as describes in the crimes act of 1958 has been available, to the security guards of prime ministers or any person whom is being attacked. Self defence again if you exercise reasonable force you can and always could do what is reasonably necessary. Self defence was always an option and I right now to all of us, you don't need any body guard, never did.

[FuzzyM]

What defines reasonable force though?
That is what I have always wondered about.

Not to mention proving who started the altercation.

[Westy]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


PRANOID!!!!!!!!!!
the lot of you!!!!!

[1290]

I learned today on the radio the PM has a private security detail with him when he goes anywhere.

Now I understand why self defence isn't an option here. We're just supposed to have private body guards? Must be nice to have the tax payer cover that for you while leaving the rest of us out to dry.

Actually in Victoria and sunny Australia we, both you and I have the same right to use force in protecting ourselves and others. Reasonable and proportionate force as describes in the crimes act of 1958 has been available, to the security guards of prime ministers or any person whom is being attacked. Self defence again if you exercise reasonable force you can and always could do what is reasonably necessary. Self defence was always an option and I right now to all of us, you don't need any body guard, never did.

Its not about whether we have the right to self defence, thats a given; its about the right to carry 'something' to aid in our defence...pepper spray, firearms whatever.....

[Die Judicii]

Try walking into a bank with a motor cycle helmet on and see how far you get.

Do they ask the walking Post Boxes to remove their head gear ?????

[cavok]

Its not about whether we have the right to self defence, thats a given; its about the right to carry 'something' to aid in our defence...pepper spray, firearms whatever.....

I am uncertain if you actually, with respect, actually understand what is written. The right to defend yourself is just that. "A person may use such force as he" etc, 462a of the crimes act. Read and understand, this is a silly subject, its there know it and use what you will. Stop looking for more than there is, "reasonable and proportionate" leave it at that and walk away. I like your statement that it's a given, if you know that, then why ask?